Re: postmaster segfaults with HUGE table - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Neil Conway
Subject Re: postmaster segfaults with HUGE table
Date
Msg-id 1100577659.23420.68.camel@localhost.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: postmaster segfaults with HUGE table  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 2004-11-15 at 21:08 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Are we going to try to test whether the behavior is appropriate when
> running out of memory to store the tlist?

We absolutely should: segfaulting on OOM is not acceptable behavior.
Testing that we recover safely when palloc() elogs (or _any_ routine
elogs) would be a good idea. I'd guess model checking would help here.

-Neil




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Treat
Date:
Subject: Re: Database reverse engineering
Next
From: Neil Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: GiST: PickSplit and multi-attr indexes